In Re: William J. Connolly Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors, William J. Connolly v. Susan L. Uecker

Ninth Circuit

In Re: William J. Connolly Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors, William J. Connolly v. Susan L. Uecker

141 F.3d 1174, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 14556, 1998 WL 133216

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 19, 1998

Docket97-15996

StatusUnpublished

This text of 141 F.3d 1174 (In Re: William J. Connolly Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors, William J. Connolly v. Susan L. Uecker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re: William J. Connolly Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors, William J. Connolly v. Susan L. Uecker, 141 F.3d 1174, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 14556, 1998 WL 133216 (9th Cir. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

141 F.3d 1174

2 Cal. Bankr. Ct. Rep. 38

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
In re: William J. CONNOLLY; Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors,
William J. CONNOLLY, Appellant,
v.
Susan L. UECKER, Appellee.

No. 97-15996.
BAP No. NC-97-01001.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

.
Submitted Mar. 10, 19982.
Decided Mar. 19, 1998.

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel J.E. Ryan, Lawrence Ollason, and James W. Meyers, Judges, Presiding.

Before FLETCHER, BEEZER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM1

Debtor William Connolly appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's dismissal as untimely of his appeal from the bankruptcy court's order and final decree in Connolly's Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Fed. R. Bankr.P. 8002 requires that a notice of appeal be filed with the BAP within 10 days of the bankruptcy court's entry of judgment. Connolly filed his notice of appeal 14 days after the bankruptcy court order. Because the "provisions of Bankruptcy Rule 8002 are jurisdictional; the untimely filing of a notice of appeal deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court's order." Saunders v. Band Plus Mortgage Corp. (In re Saunders), 31 F.3d 767, 767 (9th Cir.1994). We reject Connolly's contention that Rule 8002 violates his due process rights as a disabled litigant. See Delaney v. Alexander (In re Delaney), 29 F.3d 516 (9th Cir.1994).

Accordingly, the BAP's dismissal is

AFFIRMED.

2

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

1

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

141 F.3d 1174

2 Cal. Bankr. Ct. Rep. 38

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
In re: William J. CONNOLLY; Nancy A. Connolly, Debtors,
William J. CONNOLLY, Appellant,
v.
Susan L. UECKER, Appellee.

No. 97-15996.
BAP No. NC-97-01001.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

.
Submitted Mar. 10, 19982.
Decided Mar. 19, 1998.

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel J.E. Ryan, Lawrence Ollason, and James W. Meyers, Judges, Presiding.

Before FLETCHER, BEEZER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM1

Debtor William Connolly appeals pro se the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's dismissal as untimely of his appeal from the bankruptcy court's order and final decree in Connolly's Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Fed. R. Bankr.P. 8002 requires that a notice of appeal be filed with the BAP within 10 days of the bankruptcy court's entry of judgment. Connolly filed his notice of appeal 14 days after the bankruptcy court order. Because the "provisions of Bankruptcy Rule 8002 are jurisdictional; the untimely filing of a notice of appeal deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction to review the bankruptcy court's order." Saunders v. Band Plus Mortgage Corp. (In re Saunders), 31 F.3d 767, 767 (9th Cir.1994). We reject Connolly's contention that Rule 8002 violates his due process rights as a disabled litigant. See Delaney v. Alexander (In re Delaney), 29 F.3d 516 (9th Cir.1994).

Accordingly, the BAP's dismissal is

AFFIRMED.

2

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

1

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 F.3d 1174, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 14556, 1998 WL 133216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-william-j-connolly-nancy-a-connolly-debtors--ca9-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack